From yesterday's White House press briefing:

Q The President has repeatedly said he wants to bring democracy to Iraq. But here in the District of Columbia, citizens have no elected representatives in Congress. On the license plate, there is a permanent protest. It says "taxation without representation." What is the President doing to bring democracy to the District of Columbia?

MR. FLEISCHER: Per the Constitution, the District of Columbia is a unique entity and the President has expressed no desire to change the representation that the District of Columbia was given by the framers. And I don't really think you can equate the District of Columbia being a democracy with Iraq's failure to be a democracy, and it's, in fact, of course, a totalitarian state.

In Iraq, an undemocratic leader is "elected" every so often...whereas in DC, we're simply held to divining the mindset of a few men from the late 18th century. Imagine if Saddam's son took power and altered the constitution so that although everyone outside Baghdad could vote, people inside the city limits had no representation. He could claim he was being just as democratic as America, only because over 4 million Iraqis live in Baghdad (out of a total population of 24 million), he'd be disenfranchising 1/6 of his entire country.

So where do we draw the line here? Does DC have to become even more populous to deserve attention? Kudos to the reporter with the guts to ask the tough question, and thumbs down to the prez. for hiding behind the framers. Does Bush see fit to question the wisdom of the 3/5 slave rule, as well?